![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Nikon D40: Entry Level: http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/26/nikons-entry-level-d40-dslr-reviewed/
Nikon D60: Entry Level: http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-9206-9245 Entry Level: http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/8924.html
Nikon D50: Entry Level: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D50/D50A.HTM Entry Level: http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Nikon-D50-Digital-Camera-Review-.htm
Nikon D300: Prosumer: http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=3314&review=Nikon+D300
Nikon D200: Prosumer: http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D200-Prosumer-Must-Haves/lm/R258UA5JCH8CNS
Nikon D100: Prosumer: http://photo.net/nikon/d100/preview.html
Nikon D80: Consumer: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D80/D80A.HTM
Nikon D70: Amateur/Consumer: http://www.noendpress.com/pvachier/cameras/nikon_D70.php
Can I stop now? Thank you.. SyBerWoLff 03:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
I think the terms "consumer" and "prosumer" are unclear. In reality the distinction between consumer and professional is a false one, since anyone who uses a camera as opposed to being a dealer or a reseller, is a consumer whether they are professional or not.
In the camera magazines that I have read, "prosumer" refers to high spec compact cameras, not a digital SLRs. If you google "Nikon Prosumer" for example you get hits for the Nikon P5000, which is a different class of camera entirely.
I would suggest replacing the terms "consumer" and "prosumer" with "enthusiast" and "mid-range".
-- Molar999 04:55, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082313nikond300.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082312nikond3.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0703/07030602nikond40x.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06080903nikond80withpreview.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021605nikon_d2hs.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0409/04091605nikond2x.asp
Of the above links the ones for the D2Hs and D2Xs called them by a label, but I can't find any Nikon source calling the D40, D60, or D80 anything. Cburnett ( talk) 02:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
in this box tell, D100 n D200 is prosummer, but in above article D100 and D200 is professionals, how? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.129.186.11 ( talk • contribs) 05:32, 21 March 2007, UTC.
The D40 and D40 are both still being produced, with the 40x being a higher-quality version of the 40. I wanted to modify the template to reflect this, adding a second row to the "enthousiast" row starting from the D40x, but I don't know how to do that. Anyone? -- Yoe 19:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Nikon has somewhat changed (at least for now) the way in which its high end models are targeted at various market segments, which means that, at least for now, the old system of D2X/D2H/D200 doesn't really apply anymore.
The D3 is very much about high speed, low noise, and *low* pixel density - making it very much a D2H replacement, and nothing like a D2X, with its very high pixel density/resolving ability.
The high-res (densitywise) D300, on the other hand, is a serious step forward from both the D200, and in a way replaces the D2X too - so it could in fact be shown as superseding both models.
On the other hand - if Nikon were to release a full-frame, high pixel density "D3X" (or similar) - then it would fall nicely into the scheme once again. In any case, the D3 certainly cannot be seen, or act as a substitute for the D2X. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.211.74.250 ( talk) 11:57, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
The D300 is definitely a D200 replacement as all the features of the D200 are found in or surpassed by the D300. The D300 is not IMO a D2H(s) replacement as it has lower continous drive 6fps (d300) vs 8fps (D2H). I think the D3 is a replacement for D2Hs as everything from the D2Hs is improved or found in the D3 also it can't be called a high resoulution model because Nikon has had 12 megapixel sensor since q2 2004. And since it's a Full Frame i have renamed the category from "professional - High Resoulution & High Speed" to "professional - Full Frame - High Speed" Sorry if my train of thought is not that coherent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.136.26.193 ( talk) 16:13, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
I think there needs to be some clarification on what exactly is being debated. I don't understand what either of you want the template to look like. Tejastheory ( talk) 03:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
These categories seem a little silly. The D300 is a DX camera, just like the D2x and the D2Hs. It has a better sensor than either the D2Hs or the D2X. It shoots faster than the D2x and the same as the D2H (8fps). It is modular in that the grip must be added to achieve 8fps, but without the grip it will still do 6fps - faster than the D2x. The D300 autofocus module is improved over both the D2h and D2x. The high iso capability is greater in the D300. The body is professionally sealed against moisture and dust. The grip takes the same style high-capacity battery as the D2x and D2h.
Taking all this into account, the table should really be changed, as it could mislead a photographer into thinking the D300 is less camera than it actually is. Or conversely, the table could suggest that the D2x and D2h are more camera than they actually are.
Here in Canada, Nikon is marketing the D300 as a prosumer camera, but that is a marketing definition. Take a look at www.sportsshooter.com - there are many professional photographers upgrading from a D2h or D2x to a D300. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.31.13 ( talk) 18:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I still miss the E-series in this timeline? Wich were the first Nikon digital SLR's —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.83.8.11 ( talk) 20:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
The D300 is clearly better than the D2'ish models, that doesn't mean its replacement of the professional D2 series. The D3 is the direct successor of the D2 series. The professional D3 is vastly better than the D300. The D300 is a entry-professional at most, and an awesome prosumer at worst. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.43.229 ( talk) 05:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
On my browser (Firefox) there's a weird bug where the bottom right-half border on the D3 isn't showing up. Not quite familiar enough with the syntax to fix it. Tejastheory ( talk) 18:25, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
How about we put the references for the category names in <noinclude> tags so that they appear on the template page, but don't clutter up pages where it's transcluded? This way, the references will still be there to discourage edit warring over the category names, but won't take up space on pages for individual camera models. Cburnett, others, what do you think? A reasonable compromise or not? ǝɹʎℲxoɯ ( contrib) 03:07, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Since there were no objections, I've went ahead and made those changes here. If there aren't any other objections, I'll (or some else can) convert the other templates in a few days. Tejastheory ( talk) 07:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I notice that syberwolff has requested mediation here: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-03-31 Nikon DSLR cameras
I'm not too familiar with these sorts of things, but I'm wondering if third parties are allowed to contribute to the discussion? Because it would seem to be limiting if a mediation decision was made based on discussion limited to just two people. Tejastheory ( talk) 20:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't agree with 67.240.23.47 's edit of the template, as the D700 sits between the D3 and the D300, making it a high-range model. Nikon brands it as a professional camera, see: http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25444/D700.html SirDarius ( talk) 12:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Seriously people, There should just be 5 or 6 rows: Entry level, Midrange, Semi-pro DX, Semi-pro FX, Professional High speed, Professional, High res. - Fcb981( talk: contribs) 04:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
The chart gives the impression that the D2X was sold until the D3X was introduced and replaced it as the high resolution flagship. This is not the case. The D3 is as high in resolution as the D2X, with the added advantage of full frame. Besides, the D2X was not manufactured after the D3 was introduced. The D3 was the sole flagship Nikon body from fall '07 to fall '08, and should be listed on both rows for that period. -- rogerd ( talk) 04:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
You are right. I think this is better. 212.159.240.24 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 10:42, 9 December 2008 (UTC).
I thought it was put in between the D60 and D90. It certainly does not replace the D40 due to it's price.
68.83.12.109 (
talk)
11:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
By Matthew Choi: I think it should not be a replacement for D40, and yet its price is set between D60 and D90, and dpreview claimed that it's not a directly replacement for anything, so there is a big chance that it is, in fact, a new product line.
|
References:
-- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 19:42, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Thats the main reason. And it has a new name.
So its a NEW CLASS!
TheinfinitelyProlonged ( talk) 14:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I would agree on price and technology but new name. The only names left D10, D20, D30 in entry level so that can be reason to change name.-- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 00:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
They are not midrange DSLRs... because they are not in the middle of that camera company's DSLR range. There are half a dozen terms to refer to DSLR categories: Hobbyist, Enthusiast, Pro-sumer, Consumer, Entry Level, Flagship, Pro, High-End, Mid range, Semi-Pro, Amateur, etc. We are not going to cater to everyones favorite word for midrange DSLRs. If a camera manufacturer has 7 DSLR's on the market at a given time, numbers 2 through 6 are not mid range, maybe number 3, 4 and maybe 5 but certainly not 2 and 7.
- Fcb981( talk: contribs) 23:19, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
This template purports to divide the product line up into categories such as high end, midrange, and so on. From what I can tell, these categorizations are the opinions of the various editors. Is there any verifiable source which states that, a D3X is a flagship model or that a D90 is a midrange? If not, then I don't think we should be making those categorizations ourselves. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, the Consumer, Semi-Pro, Pro categorization are just the same. The D5000 is definitely entry-level and not mid-range. The market is yet undefined, we can have several options like the D700 and D300 line merging, the D40 and D60 line giving way to the D5000 line... why not simply eliminate these classifications and see? Or maybe we can just divide in Pro-Body (metal magnesium alloy bodies) and Am-Body (polycarbonate ones)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.226.88 ( talk) 13:13, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
However, if D5000 is entry-level then Canon EOS 500D is also has to be entry-level then Canon has no mid-range at all :-( -- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 15:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Just another idea for the template:
|
-- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 15:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Have a look my page for the price comparison. -- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 00:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
According to the price (kit $850), D5000 is a successor for D60 (kit $750), D40 (kit $800) and D50 (kit $900). -- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 00:30, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Would it be an idea to give bodies without an autofocus-motor a different background color? It limits the lenses you can buy, just as the DX/FX difference does. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.85.16.106 ( talk) 13:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
What is the color would be if Nikon releases an FX, no autofocus-motor camera? -- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 03:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
These may be historically relevant but I feel they should be left out of this template. -- 212.159.240.17 ( talk) 13:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Then add them to the left it is a time line isn't it? -- 212.159.240.18 ( talk) 13:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering why it looks like the D40 was discontinued after the first quarter of 2009. It is still for sale and still advertised on Nikon's website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.247.124.209 ( talk) 00:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
It is hard to say when it was discontinued. Most of the Nikon web sites shows only Nikon D60 and no D40 (for example: http://nikon.com.au, http://nikon.com, http://www.nikon.co.uk).-- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 06:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
What is the right name for the cameras D3s, D300s, D70s, D2Hs, D2Xs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergey shandar ( talk • contribs) 04:24, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
D300s, D3s, and D3x all have their own articles. Why can't the D40x and D70s have their own too? -- The High Fin Sperm Whale ( Talk · Contribs) 00:31, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
can someone tell me HOW to insert a template like this into a page? i'd like to have the same sort of grid for the Nikon SLR page for Sony DV cameras, but can't work how to insert it, even though i have all the data ready! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederick Michael Thomas ( talk • contribs) 05:57, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello, what is the basis of categorization in this table? -- BlackKnight ( talk) 13:23, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Anybody interested to make a Nikon table? Find it useful. Wispanow ( talk) 17:01, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
The sensor type column in this template provides ambiguous information. Of all the Nikon DSLRs produced only 5 models namely D3X, D2Xs, D3S, D3 and D700 use full-frame sensors all other models use the APS-C sensor. Thus, I would suggest that the entire type column be removed from the template. Additionally the article Comparison of Nikon DSLR Cameras can provide users with more detailed information about the sensor sizes. -- JovianEye ( talk) 00:56, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
At the moment it is claimed that it was discontinued in Nov '10. The d5000 article supports this with sources from 2 rumor sites. I can't find any reliable sources for this, and Nikon's site still shows it. Don't understand how to edit this template, if it is wrong! 93.96.148.42 ( talk) 01:55, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Don't know how to change dates in the template, but is currently wrong! 93.96.148.42 ( talk) 22:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
What happened to the timeline?? I referred to the timeline A LOT! Why was it removed and replaced with just a table in categories?? Every other major DSLR brand still has the timeline. Tmlim526 ( talk) 00:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Why was this added? There is no reliable information about this camera except some questionnable "leaks" on a rumors forum. BadaBoom ( talk) 14:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
time is moving: so have we. tried move to Template talk:Nikon DSLR and MILC cameras, but all links in the listed cameras has to be changed: no time now. Guess a bot can do that. Tagremover ( talk) 10:52, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Nikon UK categorizes cameras as Professional and Consumer. As per Nikon UK, D600 is a consumer camera. Nikon's Europe product registration site has similar classification --Anish Dosslin 20:58, 9 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anishdosslin ( talk • contribs)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Nikon D40: Entry Level: http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/26/nikons-entry-level-d40-dslr-reviewed/
Nikon D60: Entry Level: http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-9206-9245 Entry Level: http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/8924.html
Nikon D50: Entry Level: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D50/D50A.HTM Entry Level: http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Nikon-D50-Digital-Camera-Review-.htm
Nikon D300: Prosumer: http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=3314&review=Nikon+D300
Nikon D200: Prosumer: http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D200-Prosumer-Must-Haves/lm/R258UA5JCH8CNS
Nikon D100: Prosumer: http://photo.net/nikon/d100/preview.html
Nikon D80: Consumer: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D80/D80A.HTM
Nikon D70: Amateur/Consumer: http://www.noendpress.com/pvachier/cameras/nikon_D70.php
Can I stop now? Thank you.. SyBerWoLff 03:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
I think the terms "consumer" and "prosumer" are unclear. In reality the distinction between consumer and professional is a false one, since anyone who uses a camera as opposed to being a dealer or a reseller, is a consumer whether they are professional or not.
In the camera magazines that I have read, "prosumer" refers to high spec compact cameras, not a digital SLRs. If you google "Nikon Prosumer" for example you get hits for the Nikon P5000, which is a different class of camera entirely.
I would suggest replacing the terms "consumer" and "prosumer" with "enthusiast" and "mid-range".
-- Molar999 04:55, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082313nikond300.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082312nikond3.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0703/07030602nikond40x.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06080903nikond80withpreview.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021605nikon_d2hs.asp, http://www.dpreview.com/news/0409/04091605nikond2x.asp
Of the above links the ones for the D2Hs and D2Xs called them by a label, but I can't find any Nikon source calling the D40, D60, or D80 anything. Cburnett ( talk) 02:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
in this box tell, D100 n D200 is prosummer, but in above article D100 and D200 is professionals, how? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.129.186.11 ( talk • contribs) 05:32, 21 March 2007, UTC.
The D40 and D40 are both still being produced, with the 40x being a higher-quality version of the 40. I wanted to modify the template to reflect this, adding a second row to the "enthousiast" row starting from the D40x, but I don't know how to do that. Anyone? -- Yoe 19:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Nikon has somewhat changed (at least for now) the way in which its high end models are targeted at various market segments, which means that, at least for now, the old system of D2X/D2H/D200 doesn't really apply anymore.
The D3 is very much about high speed, low noise, and *low* pixel density - making it very much a D2H replacement, and nothing like a D2X, with its very high pixel density/resolving ability.
The high-res (densitywise) D300, on the other hand, is a serious step forward from both the D200, and in a way replaces the D2X too - so it could in fact be shown as superseding both models.
On the other hand - if Nikon were to release a full-frame, high pixel density "D3X" (or similar) - then it would fall nicely into the scheme once again. In any case, the D3 certainly cannot be seen, or act as a substitute for the D2X. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.211.74.250 ( talk) 11:57, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
The D300 is definitely a D200 replacement as all the features of the D200 are found in or surpassed by the D300. The D300 is not IMO a D2H(s) replacement as it has lower continous drive 6fps (d300) vs 8fps (D2H). I think the D3 is a replacement for D2Hs as everything from the D2Hs is improved or found in the D3 also it can't be called a high resoulution model because Nikon has had 12 megapixel sensor since q2 2004. And since it's a Full Frame i have renamed the category from "professional - High Resoulution & High Speed" to "professional - Full Frame - High Speed" Sorry if my train of thought is not that coherent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.136.26.193 ( talk) 16:13, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
I think there needs to be some clarification on what exactly is being debated. I don't understand what either of you want the template to look like. Tejastheory ( talk) 03:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
These categories seem a little silly. The D300 is a DX camera, just like the D2x and the D2Hs. It has a better sensor than either the D2Hs or the D2X. It shoots faster than the D2x and the same as the D2H (8fps). It is modular in that the grip must be added to achieve 8fps, but without the grip it will still do 6fps - faster than the D2x. The D300 autofocus module is improved over both the D2h and D2x. The high iso capability is greater in the D300. The body is professionally sealed against moisture and dust. The grip takes the same style high-capacity battery as the D2x and D2h.
Taking all this into account, the table should really be changed, as it could mislead a photographer into thinking the D300 is less camera than it actually is. Or conversely, the table could suggest that the D2x and D2h are more camera than they actually are.
Here in Canada, Nikon is marketing the D300 as a prosumer camera, but that is a marketing definition. Take a look at www.sportsshooter.com - there are many professional photographers upgrading from a D2h or D2x to a D300. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.31.13 ( talk) 18:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I still miss the E-series in this timeline? Wich were the first Nikon digital SLR's —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.83.8.11 ( talk) 20:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
The D300 is clearly better than the D2'ish models, that doesn't mean its replacement of the professional D2 series. The D3 is the direct successor of the D2 series. The professional D3 is vastly better than the D300. The D300 is a entry-professional at most, and an awesome prosumer at worst. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.43.229 ( talk) 05:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
On my browser (Firefox) there's a weird bug where the bottom right-half border on the D3 isn't showing up. Not quite familiar enough with the syntax to fix it. Tejastheory ( talk) 18:25, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
How about we put the references for the category names in <noinclude> tags so that they appear on the template page, but don't clutter up pages where it's transcluded? This way, the references will still be there to discourage edit warring over the category names, but won't take up space on pages for individual camera models. Cburnett, others, what do you think? A reasonable compromise or not? ǝɹʎℲxoɯ ( contrib) 03:07, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Since there were no objections, I've went ahead and made those changes here. If there aren't any other objections, I'll (or some else can) convert the other templates in a few days. Tejastheory ( talk) 07:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I notice that syberwolff has requested mediation here: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-03-31 Nikon DSLR cameras
I'm not too familiar with these sorts of things, but I'm wondering if third parties are allowed to contribute to the discussion? Because it would seem to be limiting if a mediation decision was made based on discussion limited to just two people. Tejastheory ( talk) 20:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't agree with 67.240.23.47 's edit of the template, as the D700 sits between the D3 and the D300, making it a high-range model. Nikon brands it as a professional camera, see: http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25444/D700.html SirDarius ( talk) 12:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Seriously people, There should just be 5 or 6 rows: Entry level, Midrange, Semi-pro DX, Semi-pro FX, Professional High speed, Professional, High res. - Fcb981( talk: contribs) 04:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
The chart gives the impression that the D2X was sold until the D3X was introduced and replaced it as the high resolution flagship. This is not the case. The D3 is as high in resolution as the D2X, with the added advantage of full frame. Besides, the D2X was not manufactured after the D3 was introduced. The D3 was the sole flagship Nikon body from fall '07 to fall '08, and should be listed on both rows for that period. -- rogerd ( talk) 04:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
You are right. I think this is better. 212.159.240.24 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 10:42, 9 December 2008 (UTC).
I thought it was put in between the D60 and D90. It certainly does not replace the D40 due to it's price.
68.83.12.109 (
talk)
11:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
By Matthew Choi: I think it should not be a replacement for D40, and yet its price is set between D60 and D90, and dpreview claimed that it's not a directly replacement for anything, so there is a big chance that it is, in fact, a new product line.
|
References:
-- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 19:42, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Thats the main reason. And it has a new name.
So its a NEW CLASS!
TheinfinitelyProlonged ( talk) 14:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I would agree on price and technology but new name. The only names left D10, D20, D30 in entry level so that can be reason to change name.-- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 00:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
They are not midrange DSLRs... because they are not in the middle of that camera company's DSLR range. There are half a dozen terms to refer to DSLR categories: Hobbyist, Enthusiast, Pro-sumer, Consumer, Entry Level, Flagship, Pro, High-End, Mid range, Semi-Pro, Amateur, etc. We are not going to cater to everyones favorite word for midrange DSLRs. If a camera manufacturer has 7 DSLR's on the market at a given time, numbers 2 through 6 are not mid range, maybe number 3, 4 and maybe 5 but certainly not 2 and 7.
- Fcb981( talk: contribs) 23:19, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
This template purports to divide the product line up into categories such as high end, midrange, and so on. From what I can tell, these categorizations are the opinions of the various editors. Is there any verifiable source which states that, a D3X is a flagship model or that a D90 is a midrange? If not, then I don't think we should be making those categorizations ourselves. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, the Consumer, Semi-Pro, Pro categorization are just the same. The D5000 is definitely entry-level and not mid-range. The market is yet undefined, we can have several options like the D700 and D300 line merging, the D40 and D60 line giving way to the D5000 line... why not simply eliminate these classifications and see? Or maybe we can just divide in Pro-Body (metal magnesium alloy bodies) and Am-Body (polycarbonate ones)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.226.88 ( talk) 13:13, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
However, if D5000 is entry-level then Canon EOS 500D is also has to be entry-level then Canon has no mid-range at all :-( -- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 15:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Just another idea for the template:
|
-- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 15:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Have a look my page for the price comparison. -- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 00:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
According to the price (kit $850), D5000 is a successor for D60 (kit $750), D40 (kit $800) and D50 (kit $900). -- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 00:30, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Would it be an idea to give bodies without an autofocus-motor a different background color? It limits the lenses you can buy, just as the DX/FX difference does. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.85.16.106 ( talk) 13:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
What is the color would be if Nikon releases an FX, no autofocus-motor camera? -- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 03:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
These may be historically relevant but I feel they should be left out of this template. -- 212.159.240.17 ( talk) 13:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Then add them to the left it is a time line isn't it? -- 212.159.240.18 ( talk) 13:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering why it looks like the D40 was discontinued after the first quarter of 2009. It is still for sale and still advertised on Nikon's website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.247.124.209 ( talk) 00:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
It is hard to say when it was discontinued. Most of the Nikon web sites shows only Nikon D60 and no D40 (for example: http://nikon.com.au, http://nikon.com, http://www.nikon.co.uk).-- Sergey Shandar ( talk) 06:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
What is the right name for the cameras D3s, D300s, D70s, D2Hs, D2Xs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergey shandar ( talk • contribs) 04:24, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
D300s, D3s, and D3x all have their own articles. Why can't the D40x and D70s have their own too? -- The High Fin Sperm Whale ( Talk · Contribs) 00:31, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
can someone tell me HOW to insert a template like this into a page? i'd like to have the same sort of grid for the Nikon SLR page for Sony DV cameras, but can't work how to insert it, even though i have all the data ready! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederick Michael Thomas ( talk • contribs) 05:57, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello, what is the basis of categorization in this table? -- BlackKnight ( talk) 13:23, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Anybody interested to make a Nikon table? Find it useful. Wispanow ( talk) 17:01, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
The sensor type column in this template provides ambiguous information. Of all the Nikon DSLRs produced only 5 models namely D3X, D2Xs, D3S, D3 and D700 use full-frame sensors all other models use the APS-C sensor. Thus, I would suggest that the entire type column be removed from the template. Additionally the article Comparison of Nikon DSLR Cameras can provide users with more detailed information about the sensor sizes. -- JovianEye ( talk) 00:56, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
At the moment it is claimed that it was discontinued in Nov '10. The d5000 article supports this with sources from 2 rumor sites. I can't find any reliable sources for this, and Nikon's site still shows it. Don't understand how to edit this template, if it is wrong! 93.96.148.42 ( talk) 01:55, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Don't know how to change dates in the template, but is currently wrong! 93.96.148.42 ( talk) 22:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
What happened to the timeline?? I referred to the timeline A LOT! Why was it removed and replaced with just a table in categories?? Every other major DSLR brand still has the timeline. Tmlim526 ( talk) 00:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Why was this added? There is no reliable information about this camera except some questionnable "leaks" on a rumors forum. BadaBoom ( talk) 14:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
time is moving: so have we. tried move to Template talk:Nikon DSLR and MILC cameras, but all links in the listed cameras has to be changed: no time now. Guess a bot can do that. Tagremover ( talk) 10:52, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Nikon UK categorizes cameras as Professional and Consumer. As per Nikon UK, D600 is a consumer camera. Nikon's Europe product registration site has similar classification --Anish Dosslin 20:58, 9 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anishdosslin ( talk • contribs)